Menu

The Medium is the Message

I hate the term ‘Mixed Signals’ or ‘Mixed Messages’. “I dunno man, she sending me mixed messages” is a common refrain among many a Blue Pill man.

More often than not there’s nothing ‘Mixed’ being communicated, rather it’s a failure (willful or not) to read what a woman is communicating to a man. The average guy tends to ‘get’ exactly what a woman has implied with her words, but it takes practice to read her behavior and then more practice in self-control to apply it to his own interpretation.

When a woman goes from hot to cold and back again, THIS IS the message — she’s got buyers remorse, you’re not her first priority, she’s deliberating between you and what she perceives is a better Hypergamous prospect, you were better looking when she was drunk, etc. — the message isn’t the ‘what ifs’, the message IS her own hesitation and how her behavior manifests it. 10 dates before sex? This IS the message. Canceling dates? Flaking? strong interest to weak interest? This IS the message.

Women with high interest level (IL) wont confuse you. When a woman wants to fuck you she’ll find a way to fuck you. If she’s fluctuating between being into you and then not, put her away for a while and spin other plates. If she sorts it out for herself and pursues you, then you are still playing in your frame and you maintain the value of your attention to her. It’s when you patiently while away your time wondering what the magic formula is that’ll bring her around, that’s when you lean over into her frame. You need her more than she needs you and she will dictate the terms of her attentions.

What most guys think are ‘mixed messages’ or confusing behavior coming from a woman is simply due to their inability (or refusal) to make an accurate interpretation of why she’s behaving in such a manner. Usually this boils down to a guy getting so wrapped up in a girl that he’d rather make concessions for her behavior than see it for what it really is. In other words, it’s far easier to call it ‘mixed messages’ or fall back on the old chestnut of how fickle and random women are, when in fact it’s simply a rationale to keep themselves on the hook, so to speak, because they lack any real, viable, options with other women in their lives. A woman that has a high IL in a guy has no need (and less motivation) to engage in behaviors that would compromise her status with him. Women of all ILs will test a man’s fitness (i.e. shit test), and men will pass or fail accordingly, but a test is more easily recognizable when you consider the context in which they’re delivered.

More often than not women tell the complete truth with their mannerisms and behaviors, they just communicate it in a fashion that men can’t or wont understand. As a behaviorist, I’m a firm believer in the psychological principal that the only way to determine genuine motivation and/or intent is to observe the behavior of an individual. All one need do is compare behavior and the results of it to correlate intent.

A woman will communicate vast wealths of information and truths to a man if he’s only willing to accept her behavior, not exclusively her words, as the benchmark. He must also understand that the truth she betrays in her behavior is often not what he wants to accept.

We get frustrated because women communicate differently than we do. Women communicate covertly, men communicate overtly. Men convey information, women convey feeling. Men prioritize content and information, women prioritize context and feeling when they communicate. One of the great obfuscations fostered by feminization in the last quarter-century is this expectation that women are every bit as rational and inclined to analytical problem solving as men. It’s the result of an equalist mentality that misguides men into believing that women communicate no differently than men. That’s not to discount women learning to be problem solvers in their own right, but it flies in the face how women set about a specifically feminine form of communication. Scientific study after study illustrating the natural capacity women have for exceptionally complex forms of communication (to the point of proving their neural pathways are wired differently) are proudly waved in by a feminized media as proof of women’s innate merits. Yet as men, we’re expected to accept that she “means what she says, and she says what she means.”

More than a few women like to wear this as a badge of some kind of superiority, however it doesn’t necessarily mean that what they communicate is more important, or how they communicate it is more efficient, just that they have a greater capacity to understand nuances of communication better than do men. One of the easiest illustrations of this generational gender switch is to observe the communication methods of the “strong” women the media portray in popular fiction today. How do we know she’s a strong woman? The first cue is she communicates in an overt, information centered, masculine manner.

You don’t need to be psychic to understand women’s covert communication, you need to be observant. This often requires a patience that most men simply don’t have, so they write women off as duplicitous, fickle or conniving if the name fits. Even to the Men that are observant enough, and take the needed mental notes to really see it going on around them, it seems very inefficient and irrational. And why wouldn’t it? We’re Men. Our communications are (generally) information based, deductive and rational, that’s Men’s overt communication. Blunt, to the point, solve the problem and move on to the next. Feminine communication seems insane, it is a highly dysfunctional form of communication….,to be more specific, it’s a childish form of communication. This is what children do! They say one thing and do another. they throw temper tantrums. They react emotionally to everything. Yes, they do. And more often than not, they get what they’re really after — attention. Women are crazy, but it’s a calculated crazy.

Covert communication frustrates us every bit as much as overt communication frustrates women. Our language has no art to it for them, that’s why we seem dumb or simple at best to women. We filter for information to work from, not the subtle details that make communication enjoyable for women. This is the same reason we think of feminine communication as being obfuscating, confusing, even random. The difference is that our confusion and frustration is put to their ultimate use. So long as women remain unknowable, random, irrational creatures that men can’t hope to understand (but can always excuse), they can operate unhindered towards their goals. “Silly boy, you’ll never understand women, just give up” is exactly the M.O. Once you accept this, she’s earned a lifetime of get-out-of-jail-free cards. The myth of the ‘Feminine Mystique’ and a woman’s prerogative (to change her mind) is entirely dependent upon this covert communication.

Now as Men we’ll say, “Evil, immoral, manipulative woman! Shape up and do the right thing, saying one thing then doing another makes you a hypocrite!” and of course this is our rational nature overtly making itself heard and exposing a woman’s covert communication. An appeal to morality, that’ll get her, but,..it doesn’t.

This is because women instinctively know that their sexuality is their first, best agency, and covert communication is the best method to utilize it. Appeals to morality only work in her favor, because all she need do is agree with a Man’s overt assessment of her and suddenly he thinks he’s ‘getting through to her’. As Men, we have become so conditioned by the Feminine Mystique to expect a woman to be duplicitous with us that when she suddenly leans into masculine communication forms and resorts to our own, overt communication method and agrees with us, it seems she’s had an epiphany, or a moment of clarity. “Wow, this one’s really special, ‘high quality’, and seems to get it.” That is, so long as it suits her conditions to do so. When it doesn’t, the Feminine Mystique is there to explain it all away.

Have you ever been in a social setting, maybe a party or something, with a girlfriend or even a woman you may be dating and seemingly out of the blue she says to you privately, “ooh, did you see the dirty look that bitch just gave me?!” You were right there in her physical presence, saw the girl she was talking about, yet didn’t register a thing. Women’s natural preference for covert communication is recognizable by as early as five years old. They prefer to fight in the psychological, whereas boys fight in the physical.

Within their own peer group, little girls fight for dominance with the threat of ostracization from the group. “I wont be your friend anymore if,..” is just as much a threat to a girl as “I’m gonna punch you in the face if,..” is to a boy. This dynamic becomes much more complex as girls enter puberty, adolescence and adulthood, yet they still use the same psychological mode of combat as adults. Their covert way of communicating this using innuendo, body language, appearance, sub-communications, gestures, etc. conveys far more information than our overt, all on the table, way of communicating does. It may seem more efficient to us as Men, but our method doesn’t satisfy the same purpose.

Women enjoy the communication more than the information being transferred. It’s not a problem to be solved, it’s the communication that’s primary. When a chump supplies her with everything all at once we think, yeah, the mystery is gone, he’s not a challenge anymore, why would she be interested? This is true, but the reason that intrigue is gone is because there’s no more potential for stimulating that need for communication or her imagination. Too many men buy into the lie that ‘open communication’ is the key to a good relationship and do an ‘information dump’ believing their wives or girlfriends will appreciate it. In doing so a man denies his woman the satisfaction of communicating in teasing out the information.

Nothing is more self-satisfying for a woman than for her to believe she’s figured a man out by using her mythical ‘feminine intuition’. This intuition is really just a name given to her preferred form of communication.

Lastly, I should add that women are not above using overt communication when it serves their purposes. When a woman comes out and says something in such a fashion so as to leave no margin for misinterpretation, you can bet she’s been pushed to that point out of either fear or sheer exasperation when her covert methods wont work.

“Can’t we just be friends?” is a covert rejection, “Get away from me you creep!!” is an overt rejection. When a woman opts for the overt, rest assured, she’s out of covert ideas and knows she must use men’s form of communication. This is an easy example of this, but when a woman cries on you, screams at you, or issues an ultimatum to you she is self-acknowledging that she is powerless to the point of having to come over to your way of communicating.

Likewise, men can and do master the art of covert communications as well. Great politicians, military generals, businessmen, salesmen to be sure, and of course master pickup artists all use covert communications to achieve their goals. It’s incorrect to think of covert communication as inherently dishonest or amoral, or even in a moral context. It’s a means to an end, just as overt communication is a means to an end, and that end whether decided by men or women is what’s ethical or unethical. The medium is the message.

There are women who do prefer more direct forms of communicating (i.e. overt) although they may use covert forms in some instances. Are these women masculine in nature b/c of that? I think being able to be both overt/ covert in communication and knowing when and how to use them is important. I don’t think having one over the other is beneficial. I believe a healthy man/woman knows when to use both depending on the situation.

For instance, growing up I found that I can only tolerate very small selected group of females as friends and acquaintances b/c I HATE passive aggressive behavior. I find a lot of women are very passive aggressive and even manipulative for some reason and as a woman that bothers me.

Also, could it be that the way men and women communicate has more to do with culture than biology? Do you believe women are raised and taught to not be too direct b/c “it’s not lady like” while men are raised to be more expressive in the raw b/c “its manly”?

I believe culture plays a big role in this as well. I find Black American women (for instance) tend to be much more vocal and overt in their communication styles than other races – and we are often maligned b/c of that. So which style do men actually prefer and want?

Women who are overt in communication styles are called masculine and unfeminine, while women who communicate in more covert ways are often deemed manipulative and emotional. I’d really be interested to know what men actually prefer when in relationships with women.

I would definitely agree that there are cultural variations that should be taken into account, however I’d still argue that the mechanics – essentially the neural hardwiring – make women far more prone, or at least more sensitive to nuanced forms of communication.

Certain cultures have stronger gender influence in their communication than others. Using your example of black women or Puerto Rican women, there is more of a cultural necessity to use overt, male forms of communication as a priority. This isn’t surprising considering the, generally dominant, more masculo-centric influence in those cultures. Basically the women in those cultures speak a non-native language out of necessity. This is an interesting contrast when compared to more feminized societies, where the reverse is true – the men are left confused and frustrated because of the social emphasis placed on covert, feminine-centric priority of communication.

Acculturation can certainly account for differences, or sublimations in means of expression, but it still dosen’t rewire women’s greater capacity for communication. Women begin communicating earlier in life than men, and spend more time communicating as both adolescents and adults. This verbal superiority appears as early as age 5 and doesn’t appear to be controlled by hormones. Women perform better than men on verbal tasks even when estradiol hormones were balanced among them.

On average girls age 12 to 17 send and receive 80 texts per day; boys send and receive 30 (remember that the next time you’re wondering about text Game gentlemen). More women than men use social networking, and women statistically have more friends on these sites. Roughly 60% of teenage girls call friends on their cell phones daily – boys 42%.

There is definitely more than just a communicative reward for women than simple data transfer from one to another. Women get off on the act of communicating.

ROLLO SAID This is an interesting contrast when compared to more feminized societies, where the reverse is true – the men are left confused and frustrated because of the social emphasis placed on covert, feminine-centric priority of communication.

EXACTLY. But when the feminized society is the dominant one, those who come from more masculinized sub cultures will be viewed negativley for the way they overtly communicate.

I also agree that women are much more prone to various forms of communicatoin generally.

Thanks. Point taken. I always believe being overt in communicating with your partner is best, but since society seems to reward more covert behavior from women, it can get confusing as to what men want vs. what society has placed upon men and women in terms of how to communicate effectivley.

The reason why some men may not prefer overt forms of communication from women, is b/c sometimes its not what you say but how you say it. Some people think being overt means that you can just say any old thing any kind of way and that’s just not true. One has to choose their words carefully when using overt styles of communicating in a relationship.

I’m one of the guys you point to. It’s probably the biggest obstacle to further improvement in my Game; once I met a chick who I deem both smart and pretty, I start treating her like a male friend…and her attraction evaporates.

There is a detour around the frustration Rollo describes: masculine women. I like a pretty face as much as the next guy, but if I have to trade it for masculine cognitive qualities in a woman, I do so, more ore less without complaint.

I feel sorry for guys who can only get it up (or, at least, be highly aroused) by the girliest of women. LTRs or even multiple dates with such creatures is simply beyond my nerdy constitution.

thank’s a lot rollo for your articles, this one and the “femminine mystique” has been especially illuminating to me: finally I see the whys (and hows) of years of crap in my steady agonizing 10-year-long relationship (well the early four was ok)…now I know it’s always been based on my ignorance haha… all expirience, yeah, but your contribution is invaluable.

Wish I had read this over last week after a plate went cold and I overtly chased after it. I probably could’ve salvaged it if I saw the cues coming and went ghost instead. It’s tough remaining aloof and indifferent to the shit tests power play frame control struggle. Spinning 4 other plates at the moment, but this was the top one. Any advice how long to wait before I attempt to re-engage?

Hey rollo, thanks for the posts, they flesh out what I’ve known since grade 3 or so. Because women are so different from myself. Imagine the troubles in communication for a guy with asprger’s such as myself… I just want direct communication to get the information across and to speak no more. But yes, size and handsomeness matter and alpha relating which intimidates them becaue of how cool and above it all one seems, make up for lack of talking etc. Really appreciate it man.

“One of the great obfuscations fostered by feminization in the last quarter-century is this expectation that women are every bit as rational and inclined to analytical problem solving as men. ”

I couldn’t have put it better myself. It’s become something of a social taboo, even in academic circles, to even ALLUDE to inherent cognitive differences between genders, as far as logic and analysis go.

I couldn’t agree more with this article. When conversing I’m quite frank and always forget that most others, especially women, aren’t. Needless to say, I miss a lot of subtle come-ons…many of my girlfriends later revealed they thought I was either a snob, wasn’t interested, or gay…contrary to what many profess appearing aloof can be a hindrance. Though I’m able to laugh off my denseness, it’s bothersome to miss so much covert sexual communication, and in instances when I do finally recognize it, it is only much later. I’m truly one of those guys that needs a long gaze, broad smile, or overt come-on to not miss a womans signal.

I’ve come to realize the reason many women only subtly communicate their interest is not because they can’t communicate overtly or don’t want to appear forward/slutty, rather they’re afraid to be rejected…it’s safer to let the man make an overt move than dare risk damaging their already fragile ego.

These concepts are not new to me. I first read “Women are from Venus….” 20 years ago, and that book says much of the same. However, it never occurred to me that overt communication frustrates women just as covert communication frustrates men. This is worth much more thought….

I dont think “mixed signals” is a bogus concept. Sometimes a woman is using push/pull to stir excitement, but she is genuinely interested.

Other times she might just be interested in playing around, she is keeping you interested just for the fun of it. Its just another form of attention whoring.

Its just to easy to blame the guy for not being good enough at decoding female language or actions. The guy might not even have very much behaviour to interpret apart from sparse interaction with the woman.

The “mixed signals” is often part of the message. She is activily trying to confuse you with her actions. The information is not always available because it is being deliberately conceiled. Its active deception.
Maybe signals become obvious with hindsight, when you can view the interaction and behaviour in its totality. But that is a different matter.

Much of the article has some sound analysis, but this part gives too much credit to woman and the possibility of rational analysis of female behaviour.

I’ve read this post so many times in the last month! Trying to bash this information into my skull, it seems. And not with complete success.

If we discount a woman’s words, but she is quite clearly flirtatious, no matter her relationship status, how do we tell apart the girls who are actually keen to fuck from those who are just admiring an alpha without wanting to jump ship? It can’t be as simple as saying she will be the one sucking your dick, because many women I encounter still want to be pursued … though maybe I’m doing that wrong too.

I’ve gone through this 4 times today…This is probably one of the most valuable posts Rollo has ever done. I faultered, but my kung-fu shall be stronger.
The way I see it, Rollo’s work and other relevant work in the manosphere can be related to the dialogue Morpheus had with Neo…”Are you saying that I can dodge bullets?”
“I’m saying that when you’re ready you wont have to.”
Here’s to not having to dodge bullets.

“When a woman opts for the overt, rest assured, she’s out of covert ideas. This is an easy example of this, but when a woman cries on you, screams at you, or issues an ultimatum to you she is powerless to the point of having to come over to your way of communicating.”

Is it a bad sign than she is screaming on you while you pack your stuff to move out for exmpl.?

What i mean here, that she is trying to use your way of communication, “overt”, cause post says than she is powerless to having communication her way, and what is interesting is it a good sigh than she try communicate your way? As I feel she would just ignore you if it’s really unimportant to her?

I was in a camp few weeks back. The first day at the camp this HB7 start talking with me, grabbing my hand, laughing at my joke. hich I consider it to be an IOI.

Apart from that during the course of the program I caught her many time starring at me, but the few times I try to talk to her, she’ll act cold or move away. Even though the stirring continues I didn’t bother talking to her again.

And the fact that she got a lot of men interested in her, buying her dinner didn’t help. So coming back to this post its therapeutic as I don’t have to blame myself.

here’s how i take it: women know upfront what men want from them. there’s NO FUN in just being overt, going thru the necessary steps, and arriving at the conclusion = sex.

what they want is the build-up to the romantic movie scene (in their heads). and they want MILD overt signals from you initially so they can CONFIRM your interest level before they start sending covert signals in reply (if interested).

from there, as a man, you have to, “just get it.”

my lady is equally covert & overt when she communicates bc i usually bind her up with logic to the point where she communicates DIRECTLY as i ask, or she starts ‘crying’ or literally, crying out of frustration that i don’t want to ‘play the game.’

btw, verbal silence, deflecting from a question, or just plain ignoring her antics also works wonders on her female ‘intuition.’

Good article I was wondering my sister says she’s tired and sleepy but on the other hand she’s bringing over company and going to look parties, now today she’s supposedly sick and her body hurts but she had company again and she was moving she even went to the store, she said she had to moving to get stuff from the store to make her better and she was asking people for help so after helping her they stayed over for a while,she was talking and everything but i don’t know, now she’s playing sick again and wants me to go do the store, what do you think about this Mr tomassi.

Last year I met a nice and sweet twenty something girl. She sent me some IOI´s and I started to chase her. She began to send mixed signals and I was absolutely baffled. Looking for information I found Heartiste´s blog and I realized that she perfectly matches with what Roissy calls the “Eternal Ingenue”. It was until I read your books that I understood her game and in consequence I did what I have never done before in my life; I walked away, cut all communication and did not look back. Now when she sees me I can feel she has some respect for me because I didn’t fall in her Machiavellian frame as many other chumps did.

Thanks Rollo since reading this post more than a year go I’ve completely changed my communication approach with my wife. I take my cues from careful observation – before I’d puke out a direct question. Your whole blog has been life changing. But this is one of the top 3 for me. I’ve also started to gently explain some of this to my eldest son. I have 3 sons and my mission is to try and help them navigate the troubled waters in front of them without the pain I’ve lived. If you ever find yourself in Sydney the whiskey is on me –

This article is just the shit, really changed how I perceive women’s ‘signals’.

I have to come out and say that I’m pathetic at reading the covert communication, are there any means to learn how to pick up on it and how to deduce what their hidden undertones are to their spoken messages?

“That’s not to discount women learning to be problem solvers in their own right, but it flies in the face how women set about a specifically feminine form of communication.” I agree with everything up to this point. And i only disagree with it because of semantics. While it isn’t incorrect to refer to meaning being conveyed in a more complex form than simply stating it as a “feminine” form of communication, I think it misses a very large fact. By implying that only women communicate this way it creates a blind spot that will only be remedied by personal experimentation. What I’m saying is, this ISN’T solely a female method of communication (saying one thing and meaning another, and being able to grasp that meaning by analysis of various outputs of communications ie. body language, eye contact, tonality, presence etc.). Everyone communicates this way. And while i get that this blog and all it’s information is geared towards bringing hidden truths regarding the feminine to light, I do think it is misguided to say this form of communication is specifically feminine. But for the sake of creating a better result than what already exists it works well. Just sayin’, you can read both men and wornen better by not taking them at their word and instead looking at their actions. And that fact makes it a human form of communication, not a feminine one. But again, for simplicities sake, I get it.

I take back what I said. Read the rest of the article and you covered it at the end. Damn Rollo props, you’re a good writer.

Wouldn’t ‘covert talk’ just be talking like a girl and becoming more womanly. Why the fuck are we conforming to women’s speak?? To game them? Fuck that shit man. Men should be making women be more direct, fuck this covert gay ass bullshit man. “It’s the only way! Women are DIFFERENT! We have to talk like this to ‘GAME’ them?” – fuck this shit man. This is why men are in the trenches. Because were ALL conforming to womens covert bullshit. I realize its HOW THEY TALK, and I very much like that women are different. But the conversation should be that we should be getting women to be more direct. You hit the nail on the head, when women are direct it seems ‘so profound’ and like ‘shes high quality’ and ‘understand everything’ or whatever, but the fact remains that speaking covert is to already enter her frame. The reason cunts call the police on men is cuse men are TOO direct and open and forcing her to be, sure it’ll get your ass arrested, but at least you won’t be acting like a fucking woman.

I realize after reading a few more of these posts / articles that covert game is suppose to display masculine alpha awareness when a girl is giving oyu indicators of interest or whatever, but ultimatly I odn’t know why men need to conform to her reality and world frame – why must a man ‘go into’ her reality??? I realize its one of those rare moments where a women actually feels she is ‘winning’ – the problem here is that reinforces her solipsistic mindset – ultimately its misleading to acknowledge her covert game – the example was used of some girl in lingerie playfully teasing a man saying “you can’t have any of this” and then the guy fucks her or whatever cuse he knows he’s teasing her, I get that its good to notice her covert game and the teasing aspect and all of that shit, but why the fuck are we promoting for men to go along with this sort of ‘logic’ and role playing? It’s the same reason women cheat and have affairs is because its ‘more exciting’ and it ventures into ‘role play’ and the whole undercurrent of her covert little reality she’s conjured in her head, It makes her think her subjective solipsistic reality shes conjured is legitimate.

When has teasing from a girl ever really been erotic? It’s only when you KNOW for a fact that you will fuck her. If you don’t know if you will actually fuck her than she is flexing her false reality onto you and you can’t do anything about it, god forbid you do fuck her and she cries rape. I realize using covert game is necessary and everything, and I use it myself form time to time, but ultimately I think it breeds destruction and manipulation if not ‘controlled’ properly, its the same mindset women use to rationalize having affairs and committing adultery, its a proliferation of conjuring fantasies to get wet about and then acting out on those fantasies, and worse still is that if you engage in covert game with her it opens the floodgates for her to do it with others. Because then in her mind you’ve already ‘allowed’ covert game, which to her means you can use it with anyone.

If you call a bitch out for covert game she may hate you, but if you end up with her somehow I doubt she’ll use covert game elsewhere. Whereas imagine using covert game on a girl and you two seduce each other and then end up married. That in my opinion opens the floodgates for her to still use covert game elsewhere. Point is that covert game is entirely subjective, you essentially could be conjuring a fantasy relationship with a girl using covert game, which means the relationship has no real objective value or merit aside from the ‘play’ or ‘stage’ you two have created together. Me and one of my friends would call this the ‘destiny deck’. If you play into a girls idealized fantasy of the archetypal man that she wants your playing into her ‘destiny deck’ the deck of cards in her life where she feels she has no other existential option; because its clear ‘your the one’ – this reverse oneistis is basically like convincing a a girl that you two are ‘fated’ somehow because of x, y, or z.

The point is you develop a ‘fairy-tale’ world with the girl by basically sort of allowing her to fill in the blanks for whatever rationalization she hopes to obtain, you reaffirm those ideas. Not to get all into that shit, but the point is simply that whatever ‘reality’ you end up conjuring together with her, is the one she will ultimately use for or AGAINST YOU. Most men nowadays aren’t crafting realities girls want to be apart of, or they aren’t allowing the girl to ‘craft the reality’ with them, or they are attempting to force their reality onto her when she already has her own invented. You have to basically shape the reality with the girl, the problem is when you use covert game to do this, your telling her (subconsciously or otherwise directly) that its OKAY to USE covert game everywhere else. If you start crafting a reality (aka LTR) with a girl and you use hardcore erotic covert game, your telling her its OK to use covert game elsewhere. This opens up the potential for heavy abuse; i.e. adultery, etc. Most relationships I think nowadays are failing because men don’t understand covert game, or they aren’t crafting a reality with a girl correctly, or they are implying something with the girl and then act surprised when she ACTS that way with other men. If you game her a certain way and you ALLOW that to occur in a relationship, if not properly understood, she would probably cheat on you. Rollo, my man, great stuff on this site dude, but the covert game needs some clear guidelines, I hope you sort of get what I’m saying with all of this shit.

No one is suggesting you have to communicate like a woman; in fact I’d strongly advise against it. What I am suggesting is that you recognize that this is how women communicate and you understand it’s what accounts for most guys think is miscommunication.

Never cross over into fem-speak. This is a huge mistake most Betas make thinking that they need to better identify with the feminine. All it does is make a guy one more girlfriend to her because it’s how all her girlfriends communicate.

But the implication is that were still promoting covert talk as a means of gaming girls correct? I’m implying covert talk isn’t necessarily ‘fem-speak’ but its still entering her perceived natural reality frame. Point is less about appearing ‘womanly’ to her and the fact that your acknowledging whatever twisted reality is in her head by being ‘covert’ with her.

Here’s the deal man, when you acknowledge her reality frame via covert talk you open the floodgates of whatever reality she may have. Can you imagine a girl entering the covert frame of a man>? Think 50 shades of Gray.

Here’s an example of what I’m trying to illustrate – there was an example on this website about Mad Men and the girl was on all fours while in lingerie cleaning or something and teasing the guy saying he wasn’t allowed to have her – I realize OBVIOUS (i.e. overt) displays of teasing are ONE thing, but there is a covert level of teasing with girls that if acknowledged is asking for problems. The guy knows he can have sex with the girl in lingerie so the teasing falls under ‘acceptable’ behavior(s). If you knew you couldn’t actually have sex with her and she’s teasing you in lingerie the implication is that you have no power and she perceives you as a beta or whatever. The point isn’t about how she perceives the guy. The point is when the man acknowledges her covert game and starts to ‘play along’…

We have the example of the ‘harmless’ teasing from the mistress seducing the guy while in lingerie…this appears like ‘alpha’ behavior right? The guy plays along and gets pussy because he’s not socially inept and realizes her signals of interest blah blah blah. This is ‘game’ to guys via using covert game. I agree don’t talk like a girl obviously cuse it puts you in beta-land.

What I’m saying is men should avoid playing along with covert game. Or I would at least like an explanation for how it’s not considered ‘entering her frame’ to do so…to me playing covert game with a girl is entering her frame of reality and handing all subconscious (or maybe even conscious) control over to her. Girls constantly attempting covert game on men to see if he will enter her reality frame. Why should a man play along with this?

The main point I’m trying to illustrate here if it makes any sense, is imagine a girl doing the reverse, you have the example on this site about when girls talk direct with men its because she thinks he doesn’t ‘get it’ and so she has no other mode of communication. But what I’m saying is imagine if a girl enters a man’s covert frame? He can’t do it. Because girl’s are always solipsistic, the covert reality frame they believe is exclusively theirs and theirs alone. So if a man say is seducing a girl via covert undertones, his seduction is reliant upon her investment in him; i.e. her perceived interest of wanting him.

I don’t know if this makes any sense, but the main point I’m trying to emphasize here is any ‘seduction’ you do via covert game is an acknowledgment (in the girls reality, in her head) that it’s a okay to be covert. Why would you ever want to acknowledge to a girl to be covert with you? To sleep with her right… the problem becomes that once you make it acceptable for her to use covert game there’s no denial of THAT covert reality and so it allows her to use covert elsewhere if she so chooses; that’s what covert means – it means under the surface. By you using seduction via covert tell’s her its ‘ok’ to be covert all of the time, so you end up with a girl who lives in a covert lala-land of imaginary happenings. What’s the problem with that? The problem is if a PUA comes along and uses covert on her she’ll justify it to herself as a-ok behavior, because that reality has already been framed by you (the man who should be controlling her reality frame) as acceptable behavior. Point is if you allow her to seduce you by entering her covert frame your telling her it’s ok for that frame to exist. If you allow her covert frame to exist you have a girl who is more than willing to use covert everywhere else in life and you’ll end up with a girl who will sleep around without you knowing about it, because you’ve made seduction acceptable. You may think that because girls speak covert all of the time anyways that it won’t matter if you do the same with her via covert seduction, but again, the point here is why are should the man enter her frame to do this? He needs to be pulling her out of her covert frame and into his, but this is impossible because girls are solipsistic and they aren’ going to bother with whatever covert tactics you have, they will make their own tactics.

Here’s a brief example sort of: I remember some girl at college in the lunchroom we were eating together and I gave her a napkin (cuse her hands were covered in food or something) and she was licking her fingers or something like that, and she ‘acted’ all shocked that I offered a napkin, “Oh, trying to teach me manners are you?” – to her she was consciously attempting to create a role-play of ‘seduction’ with me like I was doing something to seduce her or ‘put her in her place’ etc…I wasn’t, I simply handed her the napkin cuse it was obvious she needed it, but she was trying to game me. Point is even if you use covert game and you two seduce each other your entering her weird relative reality frame where there’s almost no point of return. It’s good for quick seduction and getting a one night stand but not much else. There’s basic flirting seduction and then there’s covert game seduction which is sort of a girls natural frame and territory. The problem with entering covert game is your entering her frame and your setting yourself up for defeat and allowing her to do whatever she wants with you.

I said at the beginning can you imagine a girl entering a man’s covert frame? Think about that for a second, if it’s even possible, which doesn’t appear so, but think about what that would look like. Some PUA’s create artificial frames for the girl to enter into HIS reality. Here’s an idea most guy’s aren’t familiar with. An example of this is like 50 shades of Gray or whatever, where the guy has the ‘power’ over the girl and ‘seduces’ her to be her slave or servant. Girls love that shit cuse it gives them a chance to tame tarzan (the perceived wild savage). Anyways the point is some guys (this is really rare bytheway) basically create these ‘erotic’ reality frames which entice girls to enter his frame. She plays along thinking it’s all for ‘fun’ and part of the ‘seduction’ process, but more often than not these guys have legit mental disorders.

Men gaming girls are in effect creating micro-frames of reality hoping she’ll enter, or if they know what their doing they simply enter hers and mess around with it. What I’m getting at is entering her covert reality frame is the equivalent of a girl entering a man’s frame…it’s fucking insanity basically. A girl entering a man’s covert reality frame is basically 50 shades of Gray, where the guy maybe has some kind of covert fetish and makes her act it out. The problem is when the fetish becomes actual reality, that’s where your going to end up with problems.

When you enter her covert frame it’s an acknowledgment to her of her fetish and the fact that she has subconscious control over you. It’s like if a girl entered some man’s fetish role-play world of toys and bondage and lesbians and orgies and to her that was ‘normal’ – I would advise against this way of thinking.

For clarification, there’s obvious teasing (which to me isn’t covert) and then there’s covert gaming where you open the floodgates of fetishism and pretty much anything goes with her cuse her reality subjective and its just how she ‘feels’ about you in the moment.

Yes, and again, women want to play the Game rather than be told they are playing a game. Demonstrate is always better than explicate. Demonstrate your strong frame, demonstrate your own identity, demonstrate what you wont accept. Do not explicate what your Red Pill awareness means to women, use it to your advantage.

Right man, I agree, but the point is women are solipsistic, so anytime you play the game (even if its on what you think are your terms) you will still be submitting to her because your entering her frame of reality. When you tell a girl explicitly your playing a game it takes her out of her reality bubble, she doesn’t like this – the point I’m making is even though she may like you (and fuck you) if you play along, it still means your submitting to her frame man. There’s no other way to phrase it dude. If you ‘play along’ with a girl, sure you’ll be able to fuck her, but your still entering her reality frame, which means your submitting to her on a subconscious level and she knows it.

It doesn’t matter how much the man demonstrates his ‘own reality’ – women are solipsistic as your aware, so any perceived ‘frame’ the man thinks he’s leading her into is false – women always think the frame exclusively revolves around them, and so it doesn’t matter how much the man demonstrates his own personal pov, the girl always believes she’s the one ‘seducing’ the man – the point I’m trying to make dude is if the man enters covert game he’s entering her frame

– anytime you enter her frame she will always believe whatever she wants to believe – all you can do is like you said ‘demonstrate your own identity’ – the problem man, is what kind of man a girl wants is entirely subjective (somewhat) – it doesn’t matter what identity you demonstrate – she either likes you or she doesn’t – I agree acting more ‘alpha’ will naturally help – but the fact remains that once you enter her frame and you try to seduce her you are kind of misleading yourself – your subconsciously submitting to her own subjective reality – a man should realize what a girl is trying to do – acknowledge her frame – call her out on it somehow (by using seduction) but at the same time downplay her frame and make her realize how unimportant it really is – you can’t live in her frame man – men are fucked if they think they can do that///am I wrong here? What am I missing?